Even borders with Odd films

There have been a few posts recently complaining that negative sizes
for 35mm and 120 are not proportional to paper sizes.

If you manage borders it is possible to get full-frame prints on
standard paper sizes.

As an example, for 35mm & 6x9cm, having a 2x3 aspect ratio:

Paper Border and image size

5x7 The closest standard size. With a 1/2" border all round the
image size is 4x6".

3.5 x 5 Half a 5 x 7. With standard 1/4" Speed-Easel borders the image
size is 3 x 4.5".

8x10 A 2x3 aspect ratio requires 2" borders and results in a 4 x 6"
image. On glossy FB/DW paper this can look quite stunning as
the image mats itself.

Trimming an inch off the long side (to make a test strip) leaves
a 7 x 10 sheet. With 1/2" borders this gives a 6x9" image.

4x5 As for 8x10: 1" borders and a 2x3" image: I have never tried
this.

Trim 1/2" to leave a 3.5 x 5, with 1/4" borders results in
a 3x4.5 image

11x14 2.5" borders and a 6x9" image
Trim to 10x14: with 1" borders the image size is 8x12"

16x20 Yaddah, yaddah ....

You will have to vary the above if you want black borders with a 26x38mm
negative carrier window.

The equation is:

Border size = (Fh * Pw - Fw * Ph) / (2 * (Fh - Fw))

Where Fh, Fw are film height and width
Ph, Pw ditto for the paper

And height width.

* * *

In my opinion, printing 'full frame' is an art-school affectation. The
world does not come in 2:3 or 4:5 ratios - if printed full frame one
can be sure of one thing: the size of the printed image is not ideal
for the subject.

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics.
Remove spaces etc. to reply: n o lindan at net com dot com
psst.. want to buy an f-stop timer? nolindan.com/da/fstop/